Immigration Judge Resigns Over Processing Demands
David Cheng leaves the bench after eight years, citing concerns over case quotas.
Updated on Oct. 27, 2026 in Immigration
Live Poll
Do you trust that current immigration court processes sufficiently protect due process for all individuals?
In July 2025, Assistant Chief Immigration Judge David Cheng resigned from his position, ending an eight-year tenure on the bench. Cheng stated that administrative demands from the Trump administration hindered his ability to ensure due process.
Why it matters
The resignation highlights ongoing tensions regarding judicial independence and the administrative pressures placed on immigration courts. Cheng pointed to requirements that forced judges to process as many as 100 cases in just two hours, severely limiting the time available for thorough legal review.
Judges were expected to process 100 cases within two-hour sessions, granting each individual case only two minutes of review. Cheng concluded a 25-year total government career, which included 15 years as a government attorney.
The players
David Cheng
He is a former assistant chief immigration judge who spent 25 years in government service before transitioning to private practice.
Jeff Sessions
He served as the Attorney General of the United States and was responsible for the appointment of David Cheng to the immigration bench in 2017.
Gendelberg Law
This is a private law firm based in New York where David Cheng began working as a senior attorney in late 2026.
The details
Cheng, who was originally appointed by Jeff Sessions in 2017, served in the Newark immigration court system. Following his departure, he joined the New York-based Gendelberg Law firm as a senior attorney on October 27, 2026.
Timeline
David Cheng was appointed as an immigration judge in 2017.
The resignation from his position as judge occurred in July 2025.
David Cheng joined the firm Gendelberg Law on October 27, 2026.
Political Context
The resignation marks a formal departure from the administrative pressures established by the Trump administration's immigration court case quotas. Critics of these policies argue that such quotas prioritize volume over the fundamental legal rights of individuals appearing before the court.
These administrative practices affect the speed and quality of legal proceedings for individuals appearing in Newark immigration courts. The shift signals potential long-term changes to how local residents navigate the immigration justice system.
The takeaway
Judicial independence remains a central point of debate within the federal court system. Experts suggest that balancing administrative efficiency with due process continues to be a primary challenge for incoming members of the bench.
Further reading
For broader trends on court operations, visit the Immigration section.
Source note: This article includes information reported by Mediaite.
Live Poll
Do you trust that current immigration court processes sufficiently protect due process for all individuals?
